OS X Leopard

[CMar]

and can run windows nativly,
will it be possible to run OS X on a Core 2 Duo based PC???

 

[LuNoTiCK]

I heard it was done.... but quickly stopped by Apple.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Yes, Apple branded Core 2 Duos.

 

[halfadder]

There is a whole underground scene of people running modified versions of Mac OS X on their homebrew generic PCs. It's even posssible to use nvidia graphics and AMD CPUs. Some people suspect that Apple is allowing some of this to occur. For example, the Intel version of Mac OS X includes PS/2 drivers for PS/2 keyboards and mice... even though Apple has never used PS/2 ports on any of their machines. Even the P4-based MacIntel developer machine used USB for keys/mouse.

Google for OSX86 Project, but know that it's not legal in USA, and in most other countries either.

 

[DasFox]

I get the feeling they're wanting to stomp on Linux.

 

[Cr0nJ0b]

I'm currently running OS X 10.4.6 on a P4 2.4Ghz system with 512MB RAM. with a nice Vid Card it runs quite well. Takes a bit of work to hack it...OSX86.org has all the info you need....

the long and the short of it is...yes Core Duo would run well with OSX...that's what they are building off now.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Cr0nJ0b
I'm currently running OS X 10.4.6 on a P4 2.4Ghz system with 512MB RAM. with a nice Vid Card it runs quite well. Takes a bit of work to hack it...OSX86.org has all the info you need....

the long and the short of it is...yes Core Duo would run well with OSX...that's what they are building off now.

I hope you have a legitimate license for that.

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: Cr0nJ0b
I'm currently running OS X 10.4.6 on a P4 2.4Ghz system with 512MB RAM. with a nice Vid Card it runs quite well. Takes a bit of work to hack it...OSX86.org has all the info you need....

the long and the short of it is...yes Core Duo would run well with OSX...that's what they are building off now.

Its not real smart to boast about running non-licensed software; especially posting it on the internet

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: DasFox
I get the feeling they're wanting to stomp on Linux.

Funny, all their marketing hype is directed towards windows. It seems to be all they can talk about.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Cr0nJ0b
I'm currently running OS X 10.4.6 on a P4 2.4Ghz system with 512MB RAM. with a nice Vid Card it runs quite well. Takes a bit of work to hack it...OSX86.org has all the info you need....

the long and the short of it is...yes Core Duo would run well with OSX...that's what they are building off now.

I hope you have a legitimate license for that.

My fiancee has been pushing me to learn about Mac so I can help her with hers when she runs into issues. I don't have a Mac nor am I going to purchase one but I'd be happy to purchase the OS X version that runs on my Intel clone. Can you point me to it?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Robor
My fiancee has been pushing me to learn about Mac so I can help her with hers when she runs into issues. I don't have a Mac nor am I going to purchase one but I'd be happy to purchase the OS X version that runs on my Intel clone. Can you point me to it?

http://www.apple.com/developer/MacOSX/

Just because it isn't available to whiners, doesn't mean you don't have to play by the rules.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Robor
My fiancee has been pushing me to learn about Mac so I can help her with hers when she runs into issues. I don't have a Mac nor am I going to purchase one but I'd be happy to purchase the OS X version that runs on my Intel clone. Can you point me to it?

http://www.fbi.gov

Just because it isn't available to whiners, doesn't mean you don't have to play by the rules.

1) I don't now and never have had any Mac OS installed on an Intel clone
2) I don't like the Mac interface so I wouldn't use it anyway. It would only be to help the fiancee
3) I'm not whining - just pointing out that (AFAIK) there is no such thing as the license you spoke of

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Robor

1) I don't now and never have had any Mac OS installed on an Intel clone
2) I don't like the Mac interface so I wouldn't use it anyway. It would only be to help the fiancee
3) I'm not whining - just pointing out that (AFAIK) there is no such thing as the license you spoke of

And my point was that because there is no license like this, no one should be doing it.

 

[L00ker]

Well send the license police after him, Do you REALLY think it is worth apples time (or any other software manufacturer/licensor) to pursue the handful of people that may or may not be using their product with a license? The courts would be backed up for years and not to mention this is the type of thing that puches products like OS X to a higher level. If you never push it and experiment you will not make progress at the rate that you do. If apple was at all concerned about it they would actually have an agressive licensing structure but they don't (in comparison to other products) and they never have, but then again they don't charge outrageous fees for their software... OS X can be had for ~70... show me which version of windows as feature rich as OS X can be had for less than $100...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: L00ker
Well send the license police after him, Do you REALLY think it is worth apples time (or any other software manufacturer/licensor) to pursue the handful of people that may or may not be using their product with a license? The courts would be backed up for years and not to mention this is the type of thing that puches products like OS X to a higher level. If you never push it and experiment you will not make progress at the rate that you do. If apple was at all concerned about it they would actually have an agressive licensing structure but they don't (in comparison to other products) and they never have, but then again they don't charge outrageous fees for their software... OS X can be had for ~70... show me which version of windows as feature rich as OS X can be had for less than $100...

This type of crap doesn't push the product at all. It's just a bunch of whiney little bitches that think they're better than the rest of the world.

 

[CMar]

Great, so don't do it and stop whining to those that do.

It aint a sin, its just illegal.

Unfortunately in the US, those that have money find it easy to buy laws that insure their monopoly on the rights to make money. I break many laws that I disagree with and I believe should not exist.

But that is not what this thread is about, it is about being able to run an alternative OS to windows on a home built PC (linux is not a n option for people that actuly want to run prductive industry standard software)

If you are not into that, don?t reply.

 

[drag]

(linux is not a n option for people that actuly want to run prductive industry standard software)

And some pirated buggy-ass version of OS X is?

You have to be joking. Somebody is going to ditch Windows and run a hacked up version of OS X just because they can use a old version of Microsoft Office for ppc Mac in rosetta. (realy sticking it to the 'man' there)

Think about what your saying sometime.

OS X pirates just want to run OS X without having to pay for Apple hardware. That's all, there is nothing more then that. There is nothing beyond that. It's worthless for real world usage. A sort of bizzare ego thing.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: CMar
Great, so don't do it and stop whining to those that do.

It aint a sin, its just illegal.

It's disrespectful to the people that put money and time into the product. That's close enough to a sin for me.

Unfortunately in the US, those that have money find it easy to buy laws that insure their monopoly on the rights to make money. I break many laws that I disagree with and I believe should not exist.

Inconsequential to the subject at hand.

But that is not what this thread is about, it is about being able to run an alternative OS to windows on a home built PC (linux is not a n option for people that actuly want to run prductive industry standard software)

That is such a stupid statement I shouldn't reply, but I will.

Productive industry standard software:
Kerberos - available on Linux
SMB shares - available on linux
sendmail - available on linux (yes, it's THE standard in email)
apache - available on Linux
Lotus notes - available on Linux
photoshop - works with wine on Linux
Office - works with Crossover Office on Linux

Hmmm, what was your point again?

If you are not into that, don?t reply.

I can diggit, but I can also respect people in the process. If you can't, walk in front of a bus.

EDIT: I probably wouldn't bitch so much if people at least bought a copy of the OS (x86/PPC/whatever) from a retailer. Yeah, it's still being assish, but just a little less.

EDIT2: Format fix.

 

[L00ker]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It's disrespectful to the people that put money and time into the product. That's close enough to a sin for me.

Are you even effin serious? Do you actually know any REAL developers? The only developers I have ever met after working in this industry for ~20 years that get bent when someone takes their product and makes it do something it wasn't designed to are the pompus arrogant ones that horde everything they do and think Bill Gates should rule the world! The others usually want to know how you made it work and are very interested in it!

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Inconsequential to the subject at hand.

Actually this is ENTIRELY consequential to the issue as it is a more than true statement, it's people like Bill Gates and other software moguls that have advocated absolutely insane levels of product licensing to the point of inconvieniencing the legitimate customer to 'insure' piracy prevention, just as a point I own a sony vaio laptop that came with XP Pro and I had some issues with it and had to re-install XP 2x in less than 120 days and had to call MS to "activate" my product key and they essentially told me "it was activated less than 120 days ago you need to purchase a new license" This is why I refuse to give them any more of MY hard earned cash because they make me jump through effin hoops to use their less than quality product.

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
That is such a stupid statement I shouldn't reply, but I will.

Productive industry standard software:
Kerberos - available on Linux
SMB shares - available on linux
sendmail - available on linux (yes, it's THE standard in email)

SENDMAIL? Are you that clueless? sure sendmail if you want the MOST insecure MTA in the industry! Sure it was standard 10-15 years ago but ANY modern *nix has replaced it with postfix qmail or some variation thereof...

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
apache - available on Linux
Lotus notes - available on Linux

Have you ever maintained a lotus based system? Holy crap I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy! And HARDLY an industry 'standard' system!

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

photoshop - works with wine on Linux
Office - works with Crossover Office on Linux

Hmmm, what was your point again?

I can diggit, but I can also respect people in the process. If you can't, walk in front of a bus.

EDIT: I probably wouldn't bitch so much if people at least bought a copy of the OS (x86/PPC/whatever) from a retailer. Yeah, it's still being assish, but just a little less.

Maybe it is you that should look for the first bus you see and RUN for it! hopefully the impact of you running at it combined with the speed it is already travelling at will cure your ignorance, if not it will certainly be one less jackhole wasting oxygen that could be otherwise used to do something productive instead of condemning people for doing something different! Thanks license nazi! Who do you work for the RIAA?

 

[CMar]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: CMar
Great, so don't do it and stop whining to those that do.

It aint a sin, its just illegal.

It's disrespectful to the people that put money and time into the product. That's close enough to a sin for me.

i never said anything about how the program is aquired, only if i would work. thanks for the judgment stranger.

Unfortunately in the US, those that have money find it easy to buy laws that insure their monopoly on the rights to make money. I break many laws that I disagree with and I believe should not exist.

Inconsequential to the subject at hand.

not at all, you bitch about people breaking some lincencing agreement that i believe should not even be legal. if i purchace it i have the right to use it as i see fit, as long as i am only using it myself, not sellinng or distributing it it any way.

But that is not what this thread is about, it is about being able to run an alternative OS to windows on a home built PC (linux is not a n option for people that actuly want to run prductive industry standard software)

That is such a stupid statement I shouldn't reply, but I will.

Productive industry standard software:
Kerberos - available on Linux
SMB shares - available on linux
sendmail - available on linux (yes, it's THE standard in email)
apache - available on Linux
Lotus notes - available on Linux
photoshop - works with wine on Linux
Office - works with Crossover Office on Linux

Hmmm, what was your point again?

sorry i havnt, nor want to, spent my life learnng the quirks of the 500894 varients of linux and the BS tweeks that are needed to run simple apps.
again, for a user that wants to spend time using apps that can be purchaced and used on an OS, and i will add without having to jump through hoops to do so, linux is a joke. great for tech heads that like to tweek stuff and have an itrest in taking part in every aspect of a application instilation, but on windows and OSX i can buy the apps i need, install them and use them WITHOUt spending all day and jumping through hoops finding secondary ways of rigging it.

[a]If you are not into that, don?t reply.

I can diggit, but I can also respect people in the process. If you can't, walk in front of a bus.

EDIT: I probably wouldn't bitch so much if people at least bought a copy of the OS (x86/PPC/whatever) from a retailer. Yeah, it's still being assish, but just a little less.[/quote]

again, your point is taken ,again, and again, and agin, make it stop, or go start a thread on the legal, social and political implications of running osx on a PC

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: L00ker

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It's disrespectful to the people that put money and time into the product. That's close enough to a sin for me.

Are you even effin serious? Do you actually know any REAL developers? The only developers I have ever met after working in this industry for ~20 years that get bent when someone takes their product and makes it do something it wasn't designed to are the pompus arrogant ones that horde everything they do and think Bill Gates should rule the world! The others usually want to know how you made it work and are very interested in it!

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Inconsequential to the subject at hand.

Actually this is ENTIRELY consequential to the issue as it is a more than true statement, it's people like Bill Gates and other software moguls that have advocated absolutely insane levels of product licensing to the point of inconvieniencing the legitimate customer to 'insure' piracy prevention, just as a point I own a sony vaio laptop that came with XP Pro and I had some issues with it and had to re-install XP 2x in less than 120 days and had to call MS to "activate" my product key and they essentially told me "it was activated less than 120 days ago you need to purchase a new license" This is why I refuse to give them any more of MY hard earned cash because they make me jump through effin hoops to use their less than quality product.

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
That is such a stupid statement I shouldn't reply, but I will.

Productive industry standard software:
Kerberos - available on Linux
SMB shares - available on linux
sendmail - available on linux (yes, it's THE standard in email)

SENDMAIL? Are you that clueless? sure sendmail if you want the MOST insecure MTA in the industry! Sure it was standard 10-15 years ago but ANY modern *nix has replaced it with postfix qmail or some variation thereof...

Sendmail WAS the most insecure MTA in the industry. Past tense. It's one of those legacy applications that started development in a different time when it wasn't so serious. Since then it's much better. There was something like 6 flaws discovered in it in the past 3 years or so. That's pretty good track record nowadays.

That's not to say that it's the best thing out there.

But it's kinda off the point. Qmail runs on Linux also, as do most everything and anything people want in regards to email except for Exchange.

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
apache - available on Linux
Lotus notes - available on Linux

Have you ever maintained a lotus based system? Holy crap I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy! And HARDLY an industry 'standard' system!

Sucking doesn't have anything to do with how it's standard or not. Its not uncommon in large businesses. Anyways it's just a example. Take Novell's groupware if you want. Or OpenExchange or any other of the dozens of free software and commercial groupware things out there for linux.

Face it when it comes to 'industry standard' there are two groups of applications.. Unix/IBM based items and Microsoft stuff. Microsoft doesn'y run well with Linux, but most everything else does. But that's just enough to make Linux less usefull for most people then it realy can be. No MS Office, No Exchange, No IE, and No Visual Basic and friends basicly means no for Linux on the desktop. It's quite a uphill battle.

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

photoshop - works with wine on Linux
Office - works with Crossover Office on Linux

Hmmm, what was your point again?

I can diggit, but I can also respect people in the process. If you can't, walk in front of a bus.

EDIT: I probably wouldn't bitch so much if people at least bought a copy of the OS (x86/PPC/whatever) from a retailer. Yeah, it's still being assish, but just a little less.

Maybe it is you that should look for the first bus you see and RUN for it! hopefully the impact of you running at it combined with the speed it is already travelling at will cure your ignorance, if not it will certainly be one less jackhole wasting oxygen that could be otherwise used to do something productive instead of condemning people for doing something different! Thanks license nazi! Who do you work for the RIAA?

Your the one somehow justifiying pirating OS X over run Linux to run 'industry standard apps' because Microsoft is a bad corporate citizen.

The way I figure it it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Microsoft sucks..
so it justifies pirating OS X (or windows for that matter).
?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: L00ker
Actually this is ENTIRELY consequential to the issue as it is a more than true statement, it's people like Bill Gates and other software moguls that have advocated absolutely insane levels of product licensing to the point of inconvieniencing the legitimate customer to 'insure' piracy prevention, just as a point I own a sony vaio laptop that came with XP Pro and I had some issues with it and had to re-install XP 2x in less than 120 days and had to call MS to "activate" my product key and they essentially told me "it was activated less than 120 days ago you need to purchase a new license" This is why I refuse to give them any more of MY hard earned cash because they make me jump through effin hoops to use their less than quality product.

The person you talked to is an idiot. You should have called back and gotten someone else. Or switch to consumer friendly software.

SENDMAIL? Are you that clueless? sure sendmail if you want the MOST insecure MTA in the industry! Sure it was standard 10-15 years ago but ANY modern *nix has replaced it with postfix qmail or some variation thereof...

Sendmail has been quite good in the past couple of years. Both qmail and postfix aren't free, so they aren't very good replacements for some OSes.

Maybe it is you that should look for the first bus you see and RUN for it! hopefully the impact of you running at it combined with the speed it is already travelling at will cure your ignorance, if not it will certainly be one less jackhole wasting oxygen that could be otherwise used to do something productive instead of condemning people for doing something different! Thanks license nazi! Who do you work for the RIAA?

:roll:

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: CMar
not at all, you bitch about people breaking some lincencing agreement that i believe should not even be legal. if i purchace it i have the right to use it as i see fit, as long as i am only using it myself, not sellinng or distributing it it any way.

If you don't like the rules these companies include with their software, DON'T USE IT. Use consumer friendly software. It's a simple solution to a silly problem.

sorry i havnt, nor want to, spent my life learnng the quirks of the 500894 varients of linux and the BS tweeks that are needed to run simple apps.

You only need to know one, and many of them are point and click friendly.

again, for a user that wants to spend time using apps that can be purchaced and used on an OS, and i will add without having to jump through hoops to do so, linux is a joke. great for tech heads that like to tweek stuff and have an itrest in taking part in every aspect of a application instilation, but on windows and OSX i can buy the apps i need, install them and use them WITHOUt spending all day and jumping through hoops finding secondary ways of rigging it.

I haven't had to jump through hoops in a while on my desktops.

again, your point is taken ,again, and again, and agin, make it stop, or go start a thread on the legal, social and political implications of running osx on a PC

There's nothing wrong with running it on a PC, an Apple branded PC anyhow.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Robor

1) I don't now and never have had any Mac OS installed on an Intel clone
2) I don't like the Mac interface so I wouldn't use it anyway. It would only be to help the fiancee
3) I'm not whining - just pointing out that (AFAIK) there is no such thing as the license you spoke of

And my point was that because there is no license like this, no one should be doing it.

I agree with you and I suspect that even those that do this do it to see if they can rather that actually use it.

I find it odd that Mac doesn't offer their 'superior' OS to the Intel clone platform though. I guess having such a limited (controlled) hardware compatibility list makes life easier for them.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Robor
I find it odd that Mac doesn't offer their 'superior' OS to the Intel clone platform though. I guess having such a limited (controlled) hardware compatibility list makes life easier for them.

From http://www.apple-history.com/body.php?page=history&section=h7:

There was one more big obstacle to tackle: Clones. Jobs felt that Clone Vendors such as Power Computing were cutting into Apple's high-end market, where they traditionally made the most profit. Clones had failed to effectively expand the MacOS market, instead taking customers away from Apple. Jobs remedied this apparent failure of the Clone experiment by all but pulling its plug.

Apparently Sculley, Spinder (who started the Mac OS licensing to 3rd party companies), and Amelio drove Apple to the brink of death.

And, if they release a stand-a-lone product they have to compete with Microsoft, and support the massive amount of crap hardware out there. Every ****** motherboard made will need to be supported, and I don't think Apple has the infrastructure out there to handle it.